Tomorrow's Supreme Court calendar probably has this guy already in line with a couple of PowerBars and an empty milk jug.

One of the most anticipated cases to come up this term, at least to those interested in criminal law and sentencing, will be argued at 10 a.m. The case is Dillon v. United States, and at issue is the question of whether the federal sentencing guidelines are binding or only advisory when defendants who were originally sentenced before the decision in United States v. Booker are resentenced pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2), after the guidelines applicable to the offense in question are changed.

Having glanced at the opinion below and the briefs (all available here from SCOTUSWiki), I believe it would be relatively easy for the Court to affirm. But, as noted by SL&P when cert was granted, this defendant has as good a set of facts as a defendant could hope for, and after being presented with countless similar cases, the Court agreed to take this one. So maybe we'll get a little surprise. Readers, feel free to play the Tenth Justice in the comments.

Comments

On Tap at SCOTUS Tomorrow: Crack, Booker and Resentencing

Tomorrow's Supreme Court calendar probably has this guy already in line with a couple of PowerBars and an empty milk jug.

One of the most anticipated cases to come up this term, at least to those interested in criminal law and sentencing, will be argued at 10 a.m. The case is Dillon v. United States, and at issue is the question of whether the federal sentencing guidelines are binding or only advisory when defendants who were originally sentenced before the decision in United States v. Booker are resentenced pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2), after the guidelines applicable to the offense in question are changed.

Having glanced at the opinion below and the briefs (all available here from SCOTUSWiki), I believe it would be relatively easy for the Court to affirm. But, as noted by SL&P when cert was granted, this defendant has as good a set of facts as a defendant could hope for, and after being presented with countless similar cases, the Court agreed to take this one. So maybe we'll get a little surprise. Readers, feel free to play the Tenth Justice in the comments.